Internal II Statistics

Introduction

In this review of literarture that supports hypothesis of Big Five personality traits are studied
below.In 2009 Angelina R. Sutin , Antonio Terracciano et al. studied high levels of neuroticism
and low levels of conscientiousness are typically linked to unhealthy habits like smoking and
overeating as well as negative health consequences like death. Less research has been done on
their relationships with physiological indicators of morbidity and mortality, such as
inflammation. The five main personality traits are compared to interleukin-6 (IL-6), a pro-
inflammatory cytokine that is frequently raised in individuals with chronic morbidity and frailty.

To study whether Neuroticism and Conscientiousness were associated with immune

Hypothesis-

Hypothesis I : There is correlation between Conscientiousness and Neuroticism.

Hypothesis II: There is significant high score for extroversion in men than in women.

Hypothesis III : Those who are highly educated will score high in openness.

Results and Discussion

In hypothesis I, Pearson’s product moment correlation was used to find relationship between
neuroticism and conscientiousness . It was found that the p value(< 2.2e-16), df (2234), t
(12.311) , confidence interval of covariant is at 95 % (Cor.coeff = 0.2520611) which indicates that
there is no significant correlation between neuroticism and conscientiousness. Hence our null
hypothesis is proved.

In hypothesis II, Welch Two Sample t-test was use to tested the difference between male and female
groups using a t-test, and the results showed that there is a statistically significant difference between
the two groups (t = -5.6164, df = 1508.5, p-value = 2.318e-08). This suggests that the mean difference
between male and female groups is not zero. Therefore, estimate that the mean difference in values for
female groups is higher than for male groups.

In previous research, higher Neuroticism and lower Conscientiousness scores were linked to higher
levels of this inflammatory marker in the blood . Thus, high Neuroticism and low Conscientiousness, two
important personality traits frequently linked to health-related behaviours and outcomes, were also
linked to high circulating IL-6, a state linked to chronic illness and frailty. (Penninx et
al. 2003; Davidson et al. 2009, Gimeno et al. 2009).

The modifiers of the personality-IL-6 connections were then investigated. The relationship
between personality and IL-6 was unaffected by either sex or age, whether it was assessed as a
continuous variable or dichotomized at age 65. The results for Neuroticism and
Conscientiousness were somewhat greater among individuals 65 years of age and older, despite
the lack of a statistically significant interaction (r =.07 for Neuroticism and r = -.16 for
Conscientiousness, both ps .05). (Sutin et al.2019)

Hypothesis II

Alternative Hypothesis: Male are more extroverted than women.

Null Hypothesis: Women are more extroverted than male.

Rationale

The two aspects of Extraversion, Enthusiasm, and Assertiveness, should diverge because women
should score higher than men in Enthusiasm (which combines sociability and positive
emotionality), whereas men should score higher in Assertiveness.

Stats (R)
Interpretation

To find whether male score high on extroversion than women was performed t-test. It was found
that the p value was 0.5749 and t value was 0.56092, which indicates that there is no significant
relationship. Hence null hypothesis is proved to be correct.

Results and Discussion

Hypothesis III

Alternative Hypothesis:

Null Hypothesis:

Rationale

Stats (R)
Interpretation

Results and Discussion

Code

#Let's call the required librabries

library(psychTools)

library(Hmisc)

library(car)

#let's import bfi data from psych package

data(bfi)

data(bfi.dictionary)

#let's assign Male and Female attributes to Gender column using a new colum named

#genderf

bfi$genderf <- factor(bfi$gender, c(1,2), c("male", "female"))

table(bfi$genderf)

#similarly let's assign the educational values

bfi$educationf <- factor(bfi$education, c(1:5), c('hs', 'finished hs', 'some college', 'college

graduate','graduate'))

table(bfi$educationf)

#Let's reverse score the items A1, C4, C5, E1, E2, O2, O5
bfi$A1 <- 6- bfi$A1

bfi$C4 <- 6- bfi$C4

bfi$C5 <- 6- bfi$C5

bfi$E1 <- 6- bfi$E1

bfi$E2 <- 6- bfi$E2

bfi$O2 <- 6- bfi$O2

bfi$O5 <- 6- bfi$O5

#let's find out total number of missing data items in the bfi

bfi$missing <- apply(bfi, 1 , function(X) sum(is.na(X)))

table(bfi$missing)

#now that we know, let's clean the data file by removing the data

#of the individuals who has missed more than 4 data items

bfi$retain <- bfi$missing < 1

new_bfi <- bfi[bfi$retain,]

View(new_bfi)

#let's introduce another variable called age_group

new_bfi$age_group <- factor(

new_bfi$age, c(3,11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,

20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29,30,

31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41,

42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50,

51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61,

62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68,

74, 86),

c("child", "teen", "teen", "teen", "teen", "teen", "teen", "teen",

"adult", "adult", "adult", "adult", "middle age", "middle age",

"middle age", "middle age", "middle age", "middle age", "middle age",

"middle age", "middle age", "middle age", "middle age", "middle age",

"middle age", "middle age", "middle age", "middle age", "middle age",

"middle age", "middle age", "middle age", "old age", "old age",

"old age", "old age", "old age", "old age", "old age", "old age",

"old age", "old age", "old age", "old age", "old age", "old age",

"old age", "old age", "old age", "old age", "senior citizen",

"senior citizen"))

#now let's assign scores to the updated bfi data sheet using bfi.keys

sc <- psych :: scoreItems(bfi.keys, new_bfi, min = 1, max = 2)

sc

round(sc$scores, 2)

#now let's create a list of all the 5 big5 components as it will come handy

#in further processes

v <- list()

v$big5 <- c("agree", "conscientious", "extraversion", "neuroticism", "openness")

table(v$big5)

#let's now assign the scores to new_bfi data sheet

new_bfi[colnames(sc$scores)] <- sc$scores

#let's calculate item correlation for big5

rcorr(as.matrix(new_bfi[,v$big5], type="pearson"))

#let's run some descriptive analysis on the data

round(psych::describe(new_bfi[,v$big5]), 2)
#let's plot some histograms

hist(new_bfi[,v$big5])

#Let's run shapiro test to check the normality of data

shapiro.test(new_bfi$agree)

shapiro.test(new_bfi$neuroticism)

shapiro.test(new_bfi$conscientious)

shapiro.test(new_bfi$openness)

shapiro.test(new_bfi$extraversion)

View(psych::describe(new_bfi))

#let's test for homogenity of variance

leveneTest(new_bfi$agree ~ new_bfi$genderf, center = mean)

leveneTest(new_bfi$extraversion ~ new_bfi$genderf, center = mean)

leveneTest(new_bfi$openness ~ new_bfi$genderf, center = mean)

leveneTest(new_bfi$conscientious ~ new_bfi$genderf, center = mean)

leveneTest(new_bfi$neuroticism ~ new_bfi$genderf, center = mean)

leveneTest(new_bfi$agree ~ new_bfi$educationf, center = mean)

leveneTest(new_bfi$extraversion ~ new_bfi$educationf, center = mean)

leveneTest(new_bfi$openness ~ new_bfi$educationf, center = mean)

leveneTest(new_bfi$conscientious ~ new_bfi$educationf, center = mean)

leveneTest(new_bfi$neuroticism ~ new_bfi$educationf, center = mean)

#let's test our first hypothesis those who score high on conscientious,

#tend to score high on neuroticism

cor.test(new_bfi$conscientious, new_bfi$neuroticism)

#let's test hypothese no. 2, Male score high on extraversion than women

t.test(extraversion ~ genderf, new_bfi)

#high on openness

AOV1 <- aov(new_bfi$openness ~ new_bfi$educationf)

summary(AOV1)

#let's do Tukey's HSD test as our final post HOC analysis

TukeyHSD(AOV1)

#let's do anova for age group as well

AOV2 <- aov(new_bfi$openness ~ new_bfi$age_group)

summary(AOV2)

#Let's do Tukey HSD test as our final post HOC analysis

TukeyHSD(AOV2)